Malta has the world's fifth fastest mobile broadband, according to a new global index published by Ookla's Speedtest.net. 

The Speedtest Global Index finds that only Norway, the Netherlands, Hungary and Singapore offer mobile users a faster internet experience than local providers, with Maltese mobile broadband reaching speeds of 44.84 Mbps. 

Fixed broadband services are not quite as fast, with speeds of 40.68 Mbps placing Malta 30th out of 122 countries surveyed. The results suggest mobile internet in Malta is faster than its fixed alternative. By contrast, Singapore, where mobile speeds are marginally faster than Malta's, offers residents fixed broadband speeds at a blistering 154.38 Mbps. 

Malta has however climbed the ranking for both services, the index finds, rising three places for mobile and one place for fixed broadband services. 

Malta ranked fifth for mobile broadband (left) and 30th for fixed (right).

The Speedtest index uses aggregates of individual users' internet speed tests to compile a picture of each country's broadband services. "Each time a test is initiated, a snapshot of what the internet looks like in that place and time is recorded. When aggregated together, these individual experiences represent the typical internet performance for a given location," Ookla explained.

Ookla runs over 6,000 servers in more than 190 countries. To be included in the index, countries must have more than 3,333 unique user tests for fixed broadband and more than 670 unique tests for mobile broadband. 

Disputed study

The index findings come just days after another test of fixed internet speeds by Cable.co.uk had ranked Malta 48th in the world, with just Cyprus and Greece faring worse among EU member states. 

That study had recorded average broadband speeds just over 10Mbps - far lower than those noted in the Speedtest Global Index released today. 

Local internet providers had reacted strongly to the Cable.co.uk findings, saying their own tests showed far faster results. The communications regulator had also questioned the study's reliability, saying its methodology was not sufficiently explained.